Re: [dnsext] Moderate one's tone, please.

Phillip Hallam-Baker <> Tue, 01 February 2011 19:06 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE13F3A6FC4 for <>; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 11:06:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.476
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.476 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.122, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IsB3ruwQiISB for <>; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 11:06:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 474F03A6FDC for <>; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 11:06:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by yie19 with SMTP id 19so3001706yie.31 for <>; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:09:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=1SstoqePZxTiU3ByaXEe5myewQRMrXYXnJnmEEma1+Y=; b=a9qLKpcW8MNHA/5p7WCN6yfa0WMy4j3fNJZJ658dqr2pM78Ql7+eySYbmQOBsLeKkr cvYCXoogAh+qWS4qQmMytJlqyI90zzk+hvb2BOklppdL5eB9Y9z2PAUlJhsRJViaVlOV O4LR4xC6LTP4aE8ORbKpoO1JlD55O2XUK1HL4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=xnX2x1FAI9HeG/rTh5dhysojT4Aw+K7WonV40DEICbjhSuNeSaP/DLOB5TFoItlB9e nABG4HFAyjIQpaVOHHDd5dNBl3OU/t7epi59PUUFFKcRHSHMWDBrRmK2KWCmu+pv+Nhn Dpg+pWBcDC0SfIr2DbPRysy5BZYC9uT2Lnbdc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id p5mr3948691ane.222.1296587378797; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:09:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with HTTP; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 11:09:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 14:09:34 -0500
Message-ID: <>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
To: Paul Hoffman <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e643465822314b049b3d4606
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Moderate one's tone, please.
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 19:06:25 -0000

The reason I took exception to your tone Paul is that I interpreted it as
implying that anyone who does not agree with you must do so from ignorance.

Many people, at least ten from the DNS and PKI fields have told me that they
do not see any point in participating in IETF because they find these
tactics unpleasant.

I know that my particular views are well founded in industry practice and
experience. I have worked on this particular problem for over fifteen years.
I have taught courses on how to manage offline keys.

I do not think that you can truthfully claim an equivalent level of
expertise. Thus for you to be using the language you do suggests that you
are attempting to bully my arguments away rather than answer them as I have
seen you do in other instances against other people who have subsequently
decided not to have anything to do with the IETF in future.

So that is the reason that I found your comments so unacceptable.

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Paul Hoffman <> wrote:

> On 2/1/11 6:43 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>> Not to pick on Paul, but again, I'd like to suggest a moderation of
>> tone.  I understand perfectly well that there are strong views here,
>> and I also think there is a perfectly legitimate technical dispute
>> here.  But let's go out of our collective way to keep our responses as
>> even as possible precisely so that we can get to a satisfying
>> conclusion for everyone.
> Phill was making technical statements, not "views". His technical
> statements were wrong. I believe that saying "poppycock" and "bosh" and
> "balderdash" instead of repeating "this is demonstrably wrong" makes the
> writing more interesting, but I hear that others may not appreciate
> interesting writing.
> Note that I did quote from the relevant RFC as I did so, and Phill has not
> responded on the technical merits (or lack thereof) of his statements.
> _______________________________________________
> dnsext mailing list